The Energy Revolution has begun and will change your lifestyle

Welcome to the Energy Blog

The Energy Blog is where all topics relating to The Energy Revolution are presented. Increasingly, expensive oil, coal and global warming are causing an energy revolution by requiring fossil fuels to be supplemented by alternative energy sources and by requiring changes in lifestyle. Please contact me with your comments and questions. Further Information about me can be found HERE.

November 28, 2006

Increasing oil prices and enthusiasm from the incoming Congress are renewing interest in sustainable energy and have led to the construction of 50 to 60 new geothermal power in nine states, Canada and six other countries.

Already in Iceland more than 17 percent of electricity, and in the Philippines, more than 27 percent, is generated from geothermal power, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. .......

Geothermal power is the most reliable and environmentally friendly form of energy. It provides baseload power 24/7 and there is enough potential geothermal energy to meet all the needs of the world. The MIT Technical Review hasanother poston the potential of geothermal and new technology that would make geothermal possible in more locations.

Comments

"Increasing oil prices and enthusiasm from the incoming Congress are renewing interest in sustainable energy and have led to the construction of 50 to 60 new geothermal power in nine states" [emphasis mine].

That statement doesn't belong in the article, much less the opening sentence.

While I don't doubt that a Democratic congress will bring more much-needed focus on sustainable energy development, this sentence is absurd. The election was less than a month ago. Are we to believe that 50 to 60 geothermal power plants were decided upon, planned and built in four weeks? That's what that sentence literally implies.

Perhaps the author meant to write something more like "will lead to the construction of..." or "have led to plans for the construction of..." rather than "have led to the construction of...".

But even that would be an opinion unsupported by anything else in the article. There are no quotes from the geothermal industry supporting the notion that they are now planning a larger number of power plants (let alone "50 to 60" more) than they were planning a month ago, and that any such change in plans (if there was any) was a result of the election.

The only reference to politics in the rest of the article was concern about whether tax credits created by the 2005 Environmental Policy Act will be renewed beyond the December 2007 deadline.

Lest anyone jump to a wrong conclusion, I should point out that I have no political loyalties. In fact, politics makes me queasy.

I wrote the comment partly because the lede sentence of the article was poorly composed and/or absurd, but also partly because I perceive a needless, unsupported, and ultimately counterproductive partisanship in it.

I think that any real progress on energy issues requires a broad, permanent consensus embraced by all parties. Energy policy is a very long term thing. The simple triumph of one party over another in any given election is too ephemeral and temporary to produce the sustained commitment, effort and policy stability required to solve our energy problems. Having one party position itself as pro-sustainable and the other position itself as pro-fossil is a recipe for failure.

Political economics tells us that no party will ever establish a "permanent majority". An energy policy that can nurture the development of sustainable energy will only work when the people and companies who actually do the research and development know that the can count on the continuation of that policy regardless of which party controls government.